However, is this concept of regulatory competition automatically a result of the legal structure of free movement in EU law, or is there a more subtle observation possible? To explore the latter, the model of harmonisation can be used to nuance the idea of automatic regulatory competition. To put this more starkly, having common rules within the European Union, established by either total or minimum harmonisation, relieves in some cases the economic incentive of regulatory competition. If European legislation sets a common standard, for instance in the sphere of environment, Member States are hindered in any attempt to compete in the race to the bottom. This race will eventually be halted to an end as a result of the European legislation, …show more content…
This is highly valued in Germany, relatively more than in the other Member States. However, if the UK, who does not hold the same value on this topic as Germany, would relax its legislation regarding employee participation in order to attract companies, it is “highly unlikely that Germany would also relax its employee participation requirement”. Naturally, this example can also be applied to a situation in which the UK would be reserved to relax its legislation, and Germany not. It serves as an illustration of the theory of “multifacety of variables” and as an argument why regulatory competition is not always automatic. Member States are sometimes unwilling to participate in regulatory competition, especially in the areas where its “core values” are highly respected. This unwillingness can stem from different reasons, both historical (the evolution of a nation’s system which is inherent in society) and political (the fear of political actors for an electoral backlash). Furthermore, if the applicable core value is widely supported throughout most of the Member States and can be described as an “European core value”, the resulted regulatory competition will be non-existing, or, more realistically, limited. In some cases, regulatory competition will therefore not happen automatically. It is more conditional, more dependent on social and political factors.
In conclusion, the idea that the legal structure of free movement in EU law automatically
Third, there is the free movement of people. Since the Schengen Agreement (1990), which was followed by the Schengen Convention, came into force in 1995, controls on people at the internal borders of the Schengen Zone were abolished in order to harmonise controls at the external frontiers and to introduce a common policy on visas and other accompanying measures like police and judicial cooperation. Additionally, the right for European citizens to move freely within the Schengen Area is determined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Originally, a right of free movement across the EU was only envisaged for the working population, as a single market could not be achieved while limitations to workforce mobility remained in existence. In Articles 39 to 42 of the EC Treaty, the right for EU workers to move freely is fixed again explicitly. This “special” kind of freedom should also include that any discrimination based on nationalities between workers of the Member States, regarding employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment, is abolished. To sum it up, people have the right to live and settle freely and companies are authorized to recruit people they need anywhere in the
Regulation is the EU’s core responsibility in the Internal Market. To make the Internal Market function properly, both EU regulation and changes in national regulation have to be enforced. It is in the EU
Treaty of Lisbon has provided that Union should uphold the representative democracy and thus, the legislative power is divided between the European Commission (‘the Commission’) which represents the interest of the European Union as a whole, the Council of Ministers (‘the Council’) which represents the Member States’ interests or their citizens and the European Parliament which represents its citizens’ interests. However, only 34% turned out to vote at the last EU election which implied a growing dissent in Europe. The EU is described as “undemocratic from the start”. The gist of the question is whether the EU law-making process is sufficiently democratic. EU’s democratic performance should be judged on the basis of subsidiarity, representativeness, accountability and engagement.
I agree that the free market would run into serious problems undercutting its sustainability without regulation; however, the free market is as much a creation of the state that is highly influenced by interest groups. Interest groups play an important role in the formation of a regulation. Interest groups help candidates get elected into government. In return, interest groups can lobby for leniencies in policies that serve their interests. For example, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers has lobbied the government of pipeline regulation, streaming of Fisheries Act, tax credits, and greenhouse gas regulations (as per Macleans.ca, The 10 lobby groups with most contact). If these private interests didn’t exist, would the general public lobby to increase tax credits to corporations? I don’t believe this is the case.
Competition in economics is rivalry in supplying or acquiring an economic service or good. Sellers compete with other sellers, and buyers with other buyers. In its perfect form, there is competition among many small buyers and sellers, none of whom is too large to affect the market as a whole; in practice, competition is often reduced by a great variety of limitations, including monopolies. The monopoly, a limit on competition, is an example of market failure. Competition among merchants in foreign trade was common in ancient times, and it has been a characteristic of mercantile and industrial expansion since the Middle Ages. By the 19th century, classical economic theorists had come to regard
What is a monopoly? According to Webster's dictionary, a monopoly is "the exclusive control of a commodity or service in a given market.” Such power in the hands of a few is harmful to the public and individuals because it minimizes, if not eliminates normal competition in a given market and creates undesirable price controls. This, in turn, undermines individual enterprise and causes markets to crumble. In this paper, we will present several aspects of monopolies, including unfair competition, price control, and horizontal, vertical, and conglomerate mergers.
In relation to participation in the EU, various countries have different approaches to encouraging employee participation.
1. Analyze the fast food industry from the point of view of perfect competition. Include the concepts of elasticity, utility, costs, and market structure to explain the prices charged by fast food retailers.
Securities regulations began in 1933 as a reaction to securities market violations. Securities regulations are a balance of investor and issuer interests. Regulations have typically been enacted in reaction to a violation that affects many, including issuers, investors, and the public. These regulations are not only created in reaction to violations, but the legislature also attempts to take a bigger step in prevention of the same violation reoccurring, as well as preventing a violation that has yet to occur. In other words, securities regulations have always been on a mission to stay one step ahead of securities violations from both issuers and investors. Regulations tend to tighten the rules to ensure investors and issuers do not have
In economics, some classical liberals believe that ‘’an unfettered market’’ is the most efficient mechanism to satisfy human needs and channel resources to their most productive uses. The minimal government advocacy of an ‘’unregulated free market’’ is founded on an ‘’assumption about individuals being rational, self-interested and methodical in the pursuit of their goals. Adam Smith was not an advocate of pure capitalism. Adam Smith allowed for many exceptions to a strictly free-market economy. The classical liberals advocated policies to increase liberty and prosperity. They sought to empower the commercial class politically. They abolish royal charters, monopolies and the protectionist policies of mercantilism to encourage
In the aftermath of the 1957 Treaty , the European Economic Community (EEC) was established and customs barriers between the member states have been abolished. Member States throughout the Community, can “promote a harmonious development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion, an increased stability, an accelerated raising of the standard of living and closer relations between them”. Therefore, in order for a common market to be established between Member States, the Community enacted some legislative provisions which aimed to a true harmonization of laws; incorporate different legal systems under a basic legal framework. The main issue arising is whether these legal provisions in accordance with the case law, ensured the free movement of goods within this market.
One of the main objectives of the European Union (EU) is the establishment of the internal market, which shall consist of “area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured. The internal market is based upon a customs union achieved through the abolition of the imposition of customs duties and charges having an equivalent effect and the prohibition of discriminatory taxes on intra-EU imports. The internal market is enhanced by the provisions on free movement of workers, freedom of establishment, free movement of services, and free movement of capital. Whereas Articles 28 to 30 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provide for the establishment of an EU common external tariff and the elimination of customs duties, Articles 34 and 35 of the TFEU (with exceptions under Article 36) go further, and prohibit quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect. Taken together, Articles 28 to 32 and 34 to 36 serve to ensure the free movement of goods within the EU and to facilitate the operation of the internal market.
Free movement of EU citizens was a major priority to pursue with the start of this union. “The idea of identifying a status for individuals benefiting from the process of European integration and its correlative label of “citizen” of the Community or of the Union goes back to the early 1970s”(Condinanzi, Lang, & Nascimbene, 1). The Paris Summit was the initiation of the idea of unifying individuals to be labeled as ‘citizens’ of the Union. Later, in 1992 the idea was finally put into effect with the Maastricht Treaty. This treaty help to progress the integration of Europeans and led to the formal recognition of the notion of European citizenship.
The European Union (EU) was established in order to prevent the horrors of modern warfare, experienced by most of Europe during the World Wars of the 20th century, from ever ensuing again, by aiming to create an environment of trust with the countries of Europe cooperating in areas such as commerce, research and trade (Adams, 2001). The EU has evolved into an economic, trade, political and monetary alliance between twenty-eight European Member States. While not all Member States are in monetary union (i.e. share the currency of the euro), those that are form the ‘Euro-zone’ (Dinan, 2006). The EU can pass a number of types of legislation, with a regulation, act, or law, being the most powerful. Its ‘tricameral’ (European Union, 2007)
With the effect of the Single European Act on 1st July 1987, the emergence of European Union (EU) as a common market has essentially been created. The benefits of this act are substantial to European firms, economies, and workers. It eliminates conflicting national regulations and trade barriers, as well as offering firms opportunity to sell their goods to all other EU members (Griffin & Pustay 2005).